Per Raising Women's Voices for the health care we need!
http://www.raisingwomensvoices.net/
The Senate HELP Committee has started work on its health care reform bill - and they need to hear from you. The bill represents a giant step forward in our efforts to get quality, affordable health care for all women, but some Senators have introduced amendments that would be very damaging to women's health and that would advance political agendas over accurate science and medicine. A few examples of what these damaging amendments propose:
Require doctors to disseminate information that is not supported by science to women seeking pregnancy-related care, including abortion.
Require parental consent for students who get services at school-based clinics.
Violate patients' rights and erode clinicians' duties to their patients by encroaching on the right to receive health services and information, including contraception, fertility services and other health care necessary to meet established medical standards of care.
Impose barriers to health care for immigrants by requiring that they be citizens for five years before participating in certain programs.
Establish a program to promote crisis pregnancy centers that withhold full, accurate information about options from women facing an unintended pregnancy, and in some cases use deceptive, inaccurate and even intimindating tactics to influence their decisions.
Scale back substantially the effort to strengthen and restore authority to the Office of Women's Health that we depend on to provide leadership, expertise and guidance on women's health concerns within the Department of Health & Human Services.
TAKE ACTION Please urge the members of the Senate HELP Committee to vote against all amendments that threaten women's health. Contact them as soon as possible, so your thoughts may be considered during the mark-up process.
Email your comments to help_comments@help.senate.gov and we encourage copying your own congressional delegation on the message as well. In addition, please copy
info@raisingwomensvoices.net so we know how many of you have raised your voices for quality, affordable health care that meets women's needs!
Let them know that you want their leadership in establishing quality, affordable health care for all women and that you want to see the bill go forward without damaging amendments like the ones being offered by Senators Coburn, Enzi and Hatch.
If you have questions or comments, please email info@raisingwomensvoices.net. Remember to act quickly - now is the time to raise our voices and let the Senators know what we need.
Description of Policy Options
Expanding Health Care Coverage:
Proposals to Provide Affordable Coverage to All Americans
http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/leg/LEG%202009/051109%20Health%20Care%20Description%20of%20Policy%20Options.pdf
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Girls/Women....Speak Out for HEALTH CARE!
Peace,
We invite you to this very important and pressing Speak Out/Town Hall Meeting next Thursday, June 18 (refer below for details). We will be discussing health care for women and our families. This is time-sensitive b/c we need to act while legislators are on recess and are in-district (in their Chicago offices, not in Springfield).
There are women and teenage girls that can not afford even the most basic care of getting their annual pap smears. We have clinics closing ie. Pilsen Women and Family Clinic and the U of Chicago Women's Clinic. We have to make sure that the new health care bill includes our whole bodies, especially our reproductive health.
For many of us our primary care doctor is our Ob/Gyn so we have to make sure that we use the power of telling our stories as a means of getting our health care needs included in the health care reform bill. And let's not forget that we are speaking out for those that may be voiceless--for instance children, the disabled, the differently minded, incarcerated women, sistas surviving on the streets etc.
Please, forward this email to all of your friends, family, neighbors, students and/or co-workers.
We deserve quality, afforadable and accessible health care,
AquaMoon
camil and veronica
Speak Out!
for the health care we need
Thursday
June 18, 2009
United Church of Hyde Park
1448 E. 53rd Street
7-9pm
RSVP at SpeakOut@spokenexistence.com
To share your story at the speak out call 773-955-2709
Come share your stories about how you’ve struggled
with the current health care system
and what needs to change.
For example—your experiences with doctors, clinics, hospitals, insurance providers, and age, size, race, class,
gender or disability insensitivities.
Health care is a human right...
We deserve affordable, accessible and quality health care.
Fed up with our broken health care system? Angry about expensive health insurance that doesn’t pay for the care that you and your family need? Outraged that insurance companies, in some states, can deny coverage of ‘pre-existing’ conditions such as, breast cancer, and other life-threatening illnesses? Can't afford your annual Paps or HPV screening? HIV/AIDS resources not accessible? Can't afford counseling or disability services? Then join the Illinois Raising Women’s Voices and the national Raising Women’s Voices Inititiative in sending a strong message to Congress that the current system is unacceptable and real health care reform is fair and just!
We will be joined by Byllye Avery...
Byllye Avery is co-founder of Raising Women’s Voices for the Health Care We Need. A dreamer, a visionary and a grassroots realist, she has combined activism with social responsibility to explore women’s health issues. Founder of the National Black Women’s Health Project and the Avery Institute for Social Change, Byllye Avery has dedicated the last 30 years to inspiring women with her experiences, wisdom and spirit.
There’s just a real special magic that happenswhen women come together to work togetherin an effective way for a common cause.– BYLLYE AVERY
Why should women raise our voices for health care reform?
Byllye: The reason why women should raise our voices is because we have a unique perspective about health care and what our health care needs are, and our perspectives need to be in the mix.
Our bodies, our lives, our health and our priorities are different from men’s. Ifyou don’t get the voices of everyone you run the risk of developing services that are ineffective and that don’t meet the people’s needs. Also, we’re the caretakers. We take care of everybody -- lot of the time before we take care of ourselves -- and we make spaces for our lovers, our sisters, our aunts, our children and our families, so it’s very important.
There’s power in our collective voices. It’s really easy to not do something... But it’s much easier go along when see other people are doing something. You become motivated, you want to join. Our whole notion is to do good in the world, to unite with other people. There’s just a real special magic that happens when women come together to work together in an effective way for a common cause.
Sponsored by: Raising Women’s Voices, Black Women for Reproductive Justice, AquaMoon, American Civil Liberties Union, Chicago Foundation for Women, Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health and more...
We invite you to this very important and pressing Speak Out/Town Hall Meeting next Thursday, June 18 (refer below for details). We will be discussing health care for women and our families. This is time-sensitive b/c we need to act while legislators are on recess and are in-district (in their Chicago offices, not in Springfield).
There are women and teenage girls that can not afford even the most basic care of getting their annual pap smears. We have clinics closing ie. Pilsen Women and Family Clinic and the U of Chicago Women's Clinic. We have to make sure that the new health care bill includes our whole bodies, especially our reproductive health.
For many of us our primary care doctor is our Ob/Gyn so we have to make sure that we use the power of telling our stories as a means of getting our health care needs included in the health care reform bill. And let's not forget that we are speaking out for those that may be voiceless--for instance children, the disabled, the differently minded, incarcerated women, sistas surviving on the streets etc.
Please, forward this email to all of your friends, family, neighbors, students and/or co-workers.
We deserve quality, afforadable and accessible health care,
AquaMoon
camil and veronica
Speak Out!
for the health care we need
Thursday
June 18, 2009
United Church of Hyde Park
1448 E. 53rd Street
7-9pm
RSVP at SpeakOut@spokenexistence.com
To share your story at the speak out call 773-955-2709
Come share your stories about how you’ve struggled
with the current health care system
and what needs to change.
For example—your experiences with doctors, clinics, hospitals, insurance providers, and age, size, race, class,
gender or disability insensitivities.
Health care is a human right...
We deserve affordable, accessible and quality health care.
Fed up with our broken health care system? Angry about expensive health insurance that doesn’t pay for the care that you and your family need? Outraged that insurance companies, in some states, can deny coverage of ‘pre-existing’ conditions such as, breast cancer, and other life-threatening illnesses? Can't afford your annual Paps or HPV screening? HIV/AIDS resources not accessible? Can't afford counseling or disability services? Then join the Illinois Raising Women’s Voices and the national Raising Women’s Voices Inititiative in sending a strong message to Congress that the current system is unacceptable and real health care reform is fair and just!
We will be joined by Byllye Avery...
Byllye Avery is co-founder of Raising Women’s Voices for the Health Care We Need. A dreamer, a visionary and a grassroots realist, she has combined activism with social responsibility to explore women’s health issues. Founder of the National Black Women’s Health Project and the Avery Institute for Social Change, Byllye Avery has dedicated the last 30 years to inspiring women with her experiences, wisdom and spirit.
There’s just a real special magic that happenswhen women come together to work togetherin an effective way for a common cause.– BYLLYE AVERY
Why should women raise our voices for health care reform?
Byllye: The reason why women should raise our voices is because we have a unique perspective about health care and what our health care needs are, and our perspectives need to be in the mix.
Our bodies, our lives, our health and our priorities are different from men’s. Ifyou don’t get the voices of everyone you run the risk of developing services that are ineffective and that don’t meet the people’s needs. Also, we’re the caretakers. We take care of everybody -- lot of the time before we take care of ourselves -- and we make spaces for our lovers, our sisters, our aunts, our children and our families, so it’s very important.
There’s power in our collective voices. It’s really easy to not do something... But it’s much easier go along when see other people are doing something. You become motivated, you want to join. Our whole notion is to do good in the world, to unite with other people. There’s just a real special magic that happens when women come together to work together in an effective way for a common cause.
Sponsored by: Raising Women’s Voices, Black Women for Reproductive Justice, AquaMoon, American Civil Liberties Union, Chicago Foundation for Women, Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health and more...
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Dating Bill of Rights...
I have a right to:
- Ask for a date
- Refuse a date
- Suggest activities
- Refuse any activities, even if my date is excited about them
- Have my own feelings and be able to express them
- Say, "I think my friend is wrong and his actions are inappropriate"
- Tell someone not to interrupt me
- Have my limits and values respected
- Tell my partner when I need affection
- Refuse affection
- Be heard
- Refuse to lend money
- Refuse sex any time, for any reason
- Have friends and space aside from my partner
I have the responsibility to:
- Determine my limits and values
- Respect the limits of others
- Communicate clearly and honestly
- Not violate the limits of others
- Ask for help when I need it
- Be considerate
- Check my actions and decisions to determine whether they are good or bad for me
- Set high goals for myself
From the Domestic Violence Advocacy Program of Family Resources, Inc.
Harm Reduction NOT Judgment...
To successfully use a harm reduction approach it takes the removal of ego or the notion that you know what's best for someone else. This approach can be applied to everyday life. You dont have to be a service provider, social worker or label yourself an advocate to apply these things to how you deal with family, friends and community. What is harm reduction...Harm reduction, or harm minimisation, refers to a range of pragmatic and compassionate public health policies designed to reduce the harmful consequences associated with drug use and other high risk activities [1]. Many advocates argue that prohibitionist laws cause harm, because, for example, they oblige prostitutes to work in dangerous conditions and oblige drug users to obtain their drugs from unreliable criminal sources. This usually involves softening punishments on risky behaviour, assisting people to stop the behaviour and addressing the reasons people engage in such behaviour.
http://eminism.org/readings/harmreduction.html#principles
Toward a Harm Reduction Approach in Survivor Advocacy
by Emi Koyama
Reprinted from the Spring 2001 newsletter of Survivor Project. Jump to principles of harm reduction in survivor advocacy.
There is no question that everyone who takes part in the movement against domestic and sexual violence is working to reduce and eliminate harms of violence in our society, but not all of us come from the specific perspective known as the harm reduction approach. How, then, is the harm reduction approach different from other approaches, and why is it important?
Harm reduction is a philosophy first developed by people organizing against HIV/AIDS crisis and other health issues among injection drug users. Harm Reduction Coalition states: "Harm reduction is a set of practical strategies that reduce negative consequences of drug use, incorporating a spectrum of strategies from safer use, to managed use to abstinence. Harm reduction strategies meet drug users where they are at, addressing conditions of use along with the use itself." HRC further states the following principles: Harm reduction:
· Accepts, for better and for worse, that licit and illicit drug use is part of our world and chooses to work to minimize its harmful effects rather than simply ignore or condemn them.
· Understands drug use as a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon that encompasses a continuum of behaviors from severe abuse to total abstinence, and acknowledges that some ways of using drugs are clearly safer than others.
· Establishes quality of individual and community life and well-being--not necessarily cessation of all drug use--as the criteria for successful interventions and policies.
· Calls for the non-judgmental, non-coercive provision of services and resources to people who use drugs and the communities in which they live in order to assist them in reducing attendant harm.
· Ensures that drug users and those with a history of drug use routinely have a real voice in the creation of programs and policies designed to serve them.
· Affirms drugs users themselves as the primary agents of reducing the harms of their drug use, and seeks to empower users to share information and support each other in strategies which meet their actual conditions of use.
· Recognizes that the realities of poverty, class, racism, social isolation, past trauma, sex-based discrimination and other social inequalities affect both people's vulnerability to and capacity for effectively dealing with drug-related harm.
· Does not attempt to minimize or ignore the real and tragic harm and danger associated with licit and illicit drug use. Harm reduction approach stands in stark contrast to the law enforcement efforts to criminalize and prosecute drug use as well as to the medical community's efforts to pathologize it. Although there are different sets of implications arising from these competing frameworks, they both threaten to take away drug users' self-definition and to reduce the impact of serious social problems such as poverty and racism to individuals' moral or biological flaws.
Simply put, harm reduction is the opposite of these paternalistic approaches exemplified by law enforcement and medical communities. By "meeting drug users where they are at," providing clean needles, gears, and accurate information about safe usage, harm reduction approach aims to save lives without relying on coercion.
Sadly, paternalism also exists in the movement against domestic violence, often in the form of official shelter (hotline, etc.) policies as well as unofficial pressures compelling survivors to act in certain ways.
An example--an old one in fact--would be how advocates frequently pressure victims of domestic violence to leave their abusers through scare tactics and guilt trips. Of course, this tendency has began to shift as we learned the fact that leaving the abuser is the single most dangerous act a victim could take and therefore we should be weary of pressuring someone to leave when s/he is not ready to do so. However, as long as we pretend to know better than the survivor does what is in her or his best interest, we are bound to make the same mistake over and over. Instead of waiting for new researches to tell us which direction we need to push survivors to, we should adopt as a fundamental principle that survivors can decide for themselves what should be done in order to be safe, and stop pressuring them in any direction--that is the harm reduction approach to survivor advocacy.
Redefined in terms of domestic violence, harm reduction is a set of practical strategies that reduce negative consequences of certain survival and coping mechanisms survivors use. It believes in creating a larger pool of options survivors can choose from, rather than narrowing them down through paternalistic guidance. In simpler terms, I am referring to many coping mechanisms that others call "maladaptive" or "unhealthy": alcohol and drug use, self-hurting, survival sex, irregular eating and sleeping patterns, as well as being in contact with the abuser.
Of course, harm reduction would not deserve its name if it merely stepped back and sat by idly as survivors engage in these behaviors; on the contrary, harm reduction, if executed correctly, requires us as advocates to do much more work than if we were working from the paternalistic approach. Under the paternalistic approach, we simply ban those behaviors we deem harmful, label survivors who use such coping mechanisms pathological or uncooperative, sending them to "treatments" or kicking them out of our programs. In a shelter working from the harm reduction approach, we need to get over our presumptions and judgments, realistically assess actual dangers, provide accurate rather than exaggerated information, and assist survivors develop strategies to do whatever it takes for them to cope while staying relatively safe from extreme dangers. No coping mechanism is "maladaptive" or "unhealthy" in itself unless and until the survivor herself or himself decides it is--at which point we offer resources that can help them develop alternative coping mechanisms. The guiding principle here is to create more options rather than less.
Harm reduction does not mean that "anything goes" either: when one survivor's coping method directly threatens the safety of others, including that of her or his children, an intervention is warranted. This includes situations where the survivor is high from using drugs and acting reckless, for example. But even then, we can address negative impacts of the particular coping mechanism and how to keep it from harming other people without labeling and banning such coping mechanisms as maladaptive or pathological. In such a situation, the role of the advocate is to assist the survivor and everyone else affected come up with a way to remove the harm rather than instructing her or him what coping method can be deployed. Survivors' their own voices must play a prominent role in determining the parameters of any interventions that affect them.
Another situation where an advocate need to intervene is when the survivor's behavior is causing an imminent life-threatening danger to herself or himself, such as when she or he is unconscious from overdosing on drugs, bleeding heavily from cutting up the vein, or refusing to eat for an extended period of time. Because the purpose of harm reduction is to reduce harm as survivors engage in whatever behavior they need to in order to feel safe and in control, overlooking any behaviors that lead up to death defeats the purpose.
Harm reduction approach in survivor advocacy is fundamentally feminist, and is true to the roots of our movement of survivors creating resources for other survivors. It demands that advocates accept survivors as the source of authority and expertise in issues that concern them, rather than relying on so-called experts to determine what they need. It seeks to empower survivors to reduce the harms of their coping mechanisms rather than to modify their behaviors.
It is an alternative to the paternalistic ways survivors are treated within abusive relationships and then by legal and medical establishments. It is a natural progression of our movement whose purpose is to empower survivors in their own unique ways rather than merely secluding them from the rest of the mean world.
And it is possible, if we as the advocates stand up to our funders, boards, and legal and medical experts and state clearly that we will not be part of a system that routinely deny survivors' right to self-determination. A true advocacy is about creating more options rather than less, and we owe it to the survivors who come to our programs.
Harm Reduction Principles in Survivor Advocacy
based on the model by Harm Reduction Coalition; adaptation by Emi Koyama
· Accepts, for better and for worse, that survivors learn to cope in whatever ways that reduce their pain and increase their sense of control, including those traditionally viewed as "unhealthy" (e.g. staying or maintaining contacts with the abuser, alcohol and drug use, wrist cutting and other self-harm, survival sex and sex work, irregular eating and sleeping patterns), and chooses to work to minimize their harmful effects rather than simply ignore or condemn them.
· Understands each method of coping as a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon that encompasses a continuum of behaviors from recklessly extreme to no action, and acknowledges that some ways of doing it are clearly safer than others.
· Establishes quality of individual and community life and well-being--not necessarily cessation of all activities deemed unhealthy or unsafe--as the criteria for successful interventions and policies.
· Calls for the non-judgmental, non-coercive provision of services and resources to people who are coping with the effects and aftermath of abuse and the communities in which they live in order to assist them in reducing attendant harm.
· Ensures that survivors themselves--both those receiving services currently and those who have in the past--routinely have a real voice in the creation of programs and policies designed to serve them.
· Affirms survivors themselves as the primary agents of reducing the harms of their various coping methods as well as the authorities on their own experiences, and seeks to empower them to share information and support each other in strategies which meet their actual conditions of survival and coping.
· Recognizes that the realities of poverty, class, racism, social isolation, past trauma, discrimination and other social inequalities affect both survivors' vulnerability to and capacity for effectively dealing with the effects and aftermath of the abuse.
· Does not attempt to minimize or ignore the real and tragic harm and danger associated with certain coping methods survivors may employ.
http://eminism.org/readings/harmreduction.html#principles
Toward a Harm Reduction Approach in Survivor Advocacy
by Emi Koyama
Reprinted from the Spring 2001 newsletter of Survivor Project. Jump to principles of harm reduction in survivor advocacy.
There is no question that everyone who takes part in the movement against domestic and sexual violence is working to reduce and eliminate harms of violence in our society, but not all of us come from the specific perspective known as the harm reduction approach. How, then, is the harm reduction approach different from other approaches, and why is it important?
Harm reduction is a philosophy first developed by people organizing against HIV/AIDS crisis and other health issues among injection drug users. Harm Reduction Coalition states: "Harm reduction is a set of practical strategies that reduce negative consequences of drug use, incorporating a spectrum of strategies from safer use, to managed use to abstinence. Harm reduction strategies meet drug users where they are at, addressing conditions of use along with the use itself." HRC further states the following principles: Harm reduction:
· Accepts, for better and for worse, that licit and illicit drug use is part of our world and chooses to work to minimize its harmful effects rather than simply ignore or condemn them.
· Understands drug use as a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon that encompasses a continuum of behaviors from severe abuse to total abstinence, and acknowledges that some ways of using drugs are clearly safer than others.
· Establishes quality of individual and community life and well-being--not necessarily cessation of all drug use--as the criteria for successful interventions and policies.
· Calls for the non-judgmental, non-coercive provision of services and resources to people who use drugs and the communities in which they live in order to assist them in reducing attendant harm.
· Ensures that drug users and those with a history of drug use routinely have a real voice in the creation of programs and policies designed to serve them.
· Affirms drugs users themselves as the primary agents of reducing the harms of their drug use, and seeks to empower users to share information and support each other in strategies which meet their actual conditions of use.
· Recognizes that the realities of poverty, class, racism, social isolation, past trauma, sex-based discrimination and other social inequalities affect both people's vulnerability to and capacity for effectively dealing with drug-related harm.
· Does not attempt to minimize or ignore the real and tragic harm and danger associated with licit and illicit drug use. Harm reduction approach stands in stark contrast to the law enforcement efforts to criminalize and prosecute drug use as well as to the medical community's efforts to pathologize it. Although there are different sets of implications arising from these competing frameworks, they both threaten to take away drug users' self-definition and to reduce the impact of serious social problems such as poverty and racism to individuals' moral or biological flaws.
Simply put, harm reduction is the opposite of these paternalistic approaches exemplified by law enforcement and medical communities. By "meeting drug users where they are at," providing clean needles, gears, and accurate information about safe usage, harm reduction approach aims to save lives without relying on coercion.
Sadly, paternalism also exists in the movement against domestic violence, often in the form of official shelter (hotline, etc.) policies as well as unofficial pressures compelling survivors to act in certain ways.
An example--an old one in fact--would be how advocates frequently pressure victims of domestic violence to leave their abusers through scare tactics and guilt trips. Of course, this tendency has began to shift as we learned the fact that leaving the abuser is the single most dangerous act a victim could take and therefore we should be weary of pressuring someone to leave when s/he is not ready to do so. However, as long as we pretend to know better than the survivor does what is in her or his best interest, we are bound to make the same mistake over and over. Instead of waiting for new researches to tell us which direction we need to push survivors to, we should adopt as a fundamental principle that survivors can decide for themselves what should be done in order to be safe, and stop pressuring them in any direction--that is the harm reduction approach to survivor advocacy.
Redefined in terms of domestic violence, harm reduction is a set of practical strategies that reduce negative consequences of certain survival and coping mechanisms survivors use. It believes in creating a larger pool of options survivors can choose from, rather than narrowing them down through paternalistic guidance. In simpler terms, I am referring to many coping mechanisms that others call "maladaptive" or "unhealthy": alcohol and drug use, self-hurting, survival sex, irregular eating and sleeping patterns, as well as being in contact with the abuser.
Of course, harm reduction would not deserve its name if it merely stepped back and sat by idly as survivors engage in these behaviors; on the contrary, harm reduction, if executed correctly, requires us as advocates to do much more work than if we were working from the paternalistic approach. Under the paternalistic approach, we simply ban those behaviors we deem harmful, label survivors who use such coping mechanisms pathological or uncooperative, sending them to "treatments" or kicking them out of our programs. In a shelter working from the harm reduction approach, we need to get over our presumptions and judgments, realistically assess actual dangers, provide accurate rather than exaggerated information, and assist survivors develop strategies to do whatever it takes for them to cope while staying relatively safe from extreme dangers. No coping mechanism is "maladaptive" or "unhealthy" in itself unless and until the survivor herself or himself decides it is--at which point we offer resources that can help them develop alternative coping mechanisms. The guiding principle here is to create more options rather than less.
Harm reduction does not mean that "anything goes" either: when one survivor's coping method directly threatens the safety of others, including that of her or his children, an intervention is warranted. This includes situations where the survivor is high from using drugs and acting reckless, for example. But even then, we can address negative impacts of the particular coping mechanism and how to keep it from harming other people without labeling and banning such coping mechanisms as maladaptive or pathological. In such a situation, the role of the advocate is to assist the survivor and everyone else affected come up with a way to remove the harm rather than instructing her or him what coping method can be deployed. Survivors' their own voices must play a prominent role in determining the parameters of any interventions that affect them.
Another situation where an advocate need to intervene is when the survivor's behavior is causing an imminent life-threatening danger to herself or himself, such as when she or he is unconscious from overdosing on drugs, bleeding heavily from cutting up the vein, or refusing to eat for an extended period of time. Because the purpose of harm reduction is to reduce harm as survivors engage in whatever behavior they need to in order to feel safe and in control, overlooking any behaviors that lead up to death defeats the purpose.
Harm reduction approach in survivor advocacy is fundamentally feminist, and is true to the roots of our movement of survivors creating resources for other survivors. It demands that advocates accept survivors as the source of authority and expertise in issues that concern them, rather than relying on so-called experts to determine what they need. It seeks to empower survivors to reduce the harms of their coping mechanisms rather than to modify their behaviors.
It is an alternative to the paternalistic ways survivors are treated within abusive relationships and then by legal and medical establishments. It is a natural progression of our movement whose purpose is to empower survivors in their own unique ways rather than merely secluding them from the rest of the mean world.
And it is possible, if we as the advocates stand up to our funders, boards, and legal and medical experts and state clearly that we will not be part of a system that routinely deny survivors' right to self-determination. A true advocacy is about creating more options rather than less, and we owe it to the survivors who come to our programs.
Harm Reduction Principles in Survivor Advocacy
based on the model by Harm Reduction Coalition; adaptation by Emi Koyama
· Accepts, for better and for worse, that survivors learn to cope in whatever ways that reduce their pain and increase their sense of control, including those traditionally viewed as "unhealthy" (e.g. staying or maintaining contacts with the abuser, alcohol and drug use, wrist cutting and other self-harm, survival sex and sex work, irregular eating and sleeping patterns), and chooses to work to minimize their harmful effects rather than simply ignore or condemn them.
· Understands each method of coping as a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon that encompasses a continuum of behaviors from recklessly extreme to no action, and acknowledges that some ways of doing it are clearly safer than others.
· Establishes quality of individual and community life and well-being--not necessarily cessation of all activities deemed unhealthy or unsafe--as the criteria for successful interventions and policies.
· Calls for the non-judgmental, non-coercive provision of services and resources to people who are coping with the effects and aftermath of abuse and the communities in which they live in order to assist them in reducing attendant harm.
· Ensures that survivors themselves--both those receiving services currently and those who have in the past--routinely have a real voice in the creation of programs and policies designed to serve them.
· Affirms survivors themselves as the primary agents of reducing the harms of their various coping methods as well as the authorities on their own experiences, and seeks to empower them to share information and support each other in strategies which meet their actual conditions of survival and coping.
· Recognizes that the realities of poverty, class, racism, social isolation, past trauma, discrimination and other social inequalities affect both survivors' vulnerability to and capacity for effectively dealing with the effects and aftermath of the abuse.
· Does not attempt to minimize or ignore the real and tragic harm and danger associated with certain coping methods survivors may employ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
